UPDATE: A source that I deem to be extremely reliable tells me that Keith Raniere is not going to put on a case and that the prosecution and the defense will both rest their cases today and that closing arguments will begin on Monday.

According to the prosecution, they may conclude their case today [Thursday], or by Friday [June 14].

They told the judge Wednesday they believed they would wind up Thursday but admitted things could go longer. It appears there may be only one more new witness – the FBI case agent.

If this is true, then Allison Mack will not testify. This may be unfortunate for her since she has been badly damaged by the testimony of her former DOS slaves, Nicole and Jaye.

Mack pleaded guilty to racketeering and racketeering conspiracy and faces a maximum prison sentence of 40 years. There is no minimum. My estimation of federal sentencing guidelines for her is in the 3-5 year range. I would have expected a chance at a downward departure – particularly if she testified for the prosecution and did well [as Lauren Salzman did].

During the last few days of trial, two women painted a brutal picture of her – not as a victim, or in any way resembling the delightful Chloe of Smallville, [the character she portrayed on TV] but as an abusive, vindictive, power-hungry, and manipulative slave master.

If Allison testified, she might have explained how Keith Raniere manipulated her. She might have told how Keith ordered her to be harsh with her two DOS slaves – and that she was trying to help them – giving them “tough love” because she believed in Keith, who told her what to do – as her slave master.

When Allison ordered Jaye to seduce Keith – Allison might have been able to explain that it was Keith who ordered her to order Jaye to seduce him.

If Nicole and Jaye are victims [and not consenting adults who did everything because they wanted to] because they had collateral held over them, so might Allison also be a victim. Keith had ample collateral on her.

Allison Mack – the photo used by the prosecution to show the jury her likeness.

**’

On Wednesday, the prosecution showed the jury nude pictures of various Raniere harem women – taken in 2005 – by Raniere on his camera. The photos were found on a hard drive seized in his sex lair [library], when it was raided on March 27, 2018 by the FBI – one day after his arrest.

All the women were over the age of consent, except one – Cami – who the prosecution will attempt to prove – in part by the lack of an appendectomy scar – which she had since age 16 – that the photos were taken of Cami when she was 15.

In New York State, the age of consent is 17. Raniere possessing the nude photographs of Cami constitutes possession of child porn [which is not one of the charges he is facing in this case] – and also evidence of the racketeering enterprise he led.

The jurors were shown photographs of the adult nude women of Raniere alongside with Cami – in part to show that they were posed the same way as the child, Cami.

Of the women whose pictures were given to the jury – and it was perhaps awkward – only Barbara Bouchey was in the courtroom, seated – as she has been since the start of this trial – in the spectator section.

It was observed that at least one juror looked at the pictures and then seemed to look over at Barbara.

Keith Alan Raniere – had a bevy of women available to him. By the way, is this his mugshot photo taken when he was arrested?

Once the prosecution rests, the defense will have the opportunity to put on a case. They do not have to put on a case. The defense does not have to prove anything. If they do put on a case, it will be up to the defendant, Keith Raniere, to decide whether he will testify.

If he does, he may be on the witness stand for days. I suspect the prosecution would be eager to cross-examine him at length – and that by itself might last four or five days.

It is not known if there will be court on Friday. My understanding is that if the prosecution rests today – and the defense chooses not to put on a case – there will be no court Friday. On Monday, closing arguments will begin and may run until Tuesday.

This would mean that by Wednesday, June 19, the jury should be deliberating on the innocence or guilt of defendant Raniere.

I would not be surprised if they return a verdict no later than Friday, June 21. [Fridays are a great day for verdicts it seems.]

On the other hand, if the defense chooses to put on a case, the end of this trial is uncertain. It might continue to the end of the month.

It does not seem many Nxivm/DOS members are prepared to testify on Raniere’s behalf. Some of them fear being criminally charged.

I was told that two Mexican, pro-Raniere witnesses wanted to testify and asked for “safe passage” via their attorneys from the DOJ. When they were not given that assurance, they declined to come from Mexico to the US to testify for fear they would be indicted as co-conspirators with Raniere.

The judge also ruled that Mexican supporters of Raniere cannot testify via closed-circuit TV from Mexico.

Perhaps Raniere will call expert witnesses. Maybe he can find DOS slaves to testify that DOS was not coercive.

More likely, if there is a defense, it will be Keith alone, taking the witness stand to show the jury why he is the smartest and most ethical man in the world.

About the author

Frank Parlato

55 Comments

It’s all very interesting – and still tantalizingly uncertain. Thanks for the update.

If the prosecution doesn’t call Mack, that indicates to me that she’s not yet distanced herself enough from her involvement with Raniere to make a good witness, as have the others who were called. That, in itself, is telling, when even Lauren Salzman – a very longtime loyalist who she leapfrogged to become Raniere’s henchwoman and the slave-mistress of DOS – has separated herself, and reflected, enough, to be able to see and articulate how what went on was wrong. And I suspect Mack is headed for a sentence at the stiffer end of the range, given the testimony about her involvement.

And were there no US-based pro-Raniere witnesses who would have been equally willing to testify, or is that degree of remaining loyalty unique to a few Mexicans?

“During the last few days of trial, two women painted a brutal picture of her – not as a victim, or in any way resembling the delightful Chloe of Smallville, [the character she portrayed on TV] but as an abusive, vindictive, power-hungry, and manipulative slave master.”
?? Have we read the same thing? Nicole talked about a loving person who never threatened her. She even said she was thankful to Allison while leaving…
Jaye tried to pin a few things on Allison but didn’t paint as much a dark portrait of Allison as she did of India.

“If Allison testified, she might have explained how Keith Raniere manipulated her. She might have told how Keith ordered her to be harsh with her two DOS slaves – and that she was trying to help them – giving them tough love because she believed in Keith, who told her what to do – as her slave master.”
That is true but when you see Jaye’s testimony, one can wonder why? It didn’t add anything to Raniere’s case! Penza just tried to charge Allison before sentencing so she decided that Allison should not testify.

As absurd as it is at the moment, the most damning testimony is from Lauren and if Allison testified, she could have sealed the case against Raniere…
Here, Allison risks getting more time (depending on the judge and how he will see the whole case) and Raniere gets a chance to get the least amount…
Agnifillo didn’t even try to cross-examine Jaye…It’s not because he wants to protect the witness but because of the weakness of the testimony and how it’s not relevant to Raniere’s charge but against a défendant who pleaded already…And not even for criminal purpose as nothing criminal is done by Allison against Jay.

It’s obvious (seeing the guilty plea allocution that Allison gave) that Allison wasn’t refusing to testify but ultimately, it’s the prosecution who decides.
And Penza’s action during the testimonies show that she is not really trying hard to get Raniere down but look for Allison to get the max.

What is even more absurd is that in the end, Allison risks probably 3 years while Lauren who was in almost EVERY CRIME CITED will possibly get no time because the judge had sympathy for her…

I suspect that this is why Penza is not requiring Allison to testify. Allison testifying meant that she would probably get something like probation rather than jail time.

Still, I hope the judge sees the Truth and will be lenient toward Allison because one fact is clear:
More than ever , Allison has been shownto be, at best, a pawn in this case!

Are Mack (and the others who took a plea) affected in any way by what is said about them in KAR’s trial?
I think they are not, and their sentences imposed by the judge has to be based only on what the Feds charged them with and what they pled to.

Therefore it doesn’t matter how badly Mack was portrayed in this trial, it would seem to be immaterial to what sentence the judge gives her…because she was not on trial here,

Thank you. I’ve been learning from the long and strong work of Rick Ross since 2005, when a combo of my own research and some very good luck drew me to his research, experience and analysis. The jury is fortunate to be given the chance to listen to Rick Ross testify. I’d like to learn every word of what he said during his testimony, too.

“Keith Raniere is not going to put on a case and that the prosecution will rest its case today and that closing arguments will begin on Monday.” The defense is admiting its lack of arguments, KR is fried!!

All I can figure vis a vis Nancy Salzman, Mack and Bronfman is that the prosecution had doubts about whether they would end up giving testimony that would be helpful to Raniere. In other words, there was concern that the Kool-aid was still in their systems. If that’s the case, I’m not sure why the prosecution offered them a deal. My understanding is that the main reason for offering a deal in a crime involving several defendants is to obtain testimony from the defendants who plead guilty (a la Lauren Salzman).

I truly can’t understand why Nancy Salzman, Mack, and Bronfman would not have to testify as part of their guilty pleas. (I’m suspect that there is a good reason – anyone know what it is)?

N Salzman, Mack and Bronfman all believe Nxivm helped many people despite the abuses of KAR. Their testimony might cause doubt in the jurors over the guilt of Raniere and shift the focus away from his culpability to their own culpability. The prosecution wants to keep it simple. Furthermore, they know NDNY can also go after Raniere on the child pornography and statutory rape issues.

Double Anonymous:
I hate to be a pessimist but the NDNY will do nothing and the State of New York will do less than nothing.
And when NXIVM regroups many of the same cast of characters will return like the bad soap opera NXIVM is.

They offered them the deal to shut up and shut this down….nys will do nothing {but go after trump as instructed by invisible strings} and nxivm will regroup bigger creepier and in tact elsewhere {Age of consent is 12 there}

Angela:
You’ve hit on the reason.
Nancy, Allison and Clare are as culpable as Raniere and they are all True Believers in NXIVM.
They are all drunk on the NXIVM Kool-Aid.
NXIVM will return and the same people in the old cult will be prominent in the new improved (?) NXIVM.

Interesting. From the perspective of a civil attorney, in a civil trial, lawyers try to start and finish with their strongest witnesses. If the prosecution ends w an FBI agent, I wonder what he/she will have to say. If it is mostly a reciting of emails, texts, and financial documents, I can’t imagine that would be as powerful as putting a victim on the stand to end the case. That said, it may be that the prosecution is simply wanting to nail down the more procedural elements of Raniere’s federal crimes.

If the jury operates as instructed by the judge, they will have to focus solely on the federal crimes that Raniere is charged with. For example, he hasn’t (and couldn’t be) charged with possession of child porn, kidnapping, etc – those would have to be prosecuted under state law.

If Raniere is found “not guilty,” I can’t imagine that the State of New York won’t charge him. Of course, y’all have been around this block much longer and know much more about it than I do. Sounds like the State of NY has known for a long time that crimes were committed and chose to turn a blind eye. Maybe the publicity and outrage will force their hand.

[I don’t think this is true but it damn sure is funny. Saratoga Flash is a blog based in Saratoga Springs, NY – and a pseudo-successor to John Tighe’s Saratoga In Decline blog]

Saratoga Flash News

Keith Raniere’s defense attorney asks judge to seat his client at a separate table during remainder of trial in the interest of properly defending him.

“My client scribbles to me, on average, a note every 20 seconds each and every day, telling me how to do my job,’ the clearly exacerbated counselor said after the jury was sent to a back room.

“Worse, he’ll whisper to me of his sexual experiences with whatever female witness is on the stand. The details he told me of the last one had my hair standing on edge. He’s not letting me concentrate on the testimony”

Members of the press that have been following the trial have reportedly started a wagering pool on the likelihood of Raniere himself giving his own closing statement.

Hey Nicki Clyne, you made the local newspaper!
Anyone up for a road trip to Flintock Lane?
Allison Mack’s Wife Spotted Near NXIVM Headquarters
Allison Mack’s wife has been lurking around upstate New York nearby the NXIVM sex cult headquarters, RadarOnline.com can exclusively report.https://www.facebook.com/SaratogaFlashNews/

No testimony by Karen Unterreiner??? Nothing about tax evasion, corruption of public autorities, abuse of legal system, etc.? This trial only scratched the surface so far. I hope that Albany County will make a more complete trial on their own.

Alex, the US DOJ NDNY will do nothing except maybe the child porn case if they can’t avoid it.

As for Albany County, they will do less than nothing.
My open letter to the New York State government was a “Hail Mary” pass on my part.
I believe that I don’t have the right to complain if I don’t try something.

And don’t be surprised ten years from now if NXIVM still exists in some form.
Perhaps even stronger than ever.

It is actually very possible that KR dares to do he’s own closing statment, he’s narcisistic and crazy enough to pull something like that. Besides, he’s not paying for his defense, so he doesn’t really care. That would be something to behold: the monster defending himself and tossing aside the million dollar defense team CB is paying for him.

Let’s see which is more accurate – Frank’s source or his own investigative insight. I seem to recall many contradictory postings on Nancy Salzman. One week cooperating, next not, soon to plea, then not. LOL

Listened to a podcast NXIVM coach Kristin Kreuk did with fellow Smallville actor to see any reference to NXIVM and Allison Mack. Not a word about it. Lots of MeToo references, but none NXIVM. Then, the interviewer asked about Girls By Design, though not by name. Kreuk quickly changed the subject to something about indigenous people! You can’t talk about MeToo while silent about NXIVM.

For Kristen Kreuk and her Smallville cast mates Allison Mack and NXIVM will disappear down George Orwell’s “Memory Hole.”

Memory hole
A memory hole is any mechanism for the alteration or disappearance of inconvenient or embarrassing documents, photographs, transcripts or other records, such as from a website or other archive, particularly as part of an attempt to give the impression that something never happened.[1][2] The concept was first popularized by George Orwell’s dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, where the Party’s Ministry of Truth systematically re-created all potentially embarrassing historical documents, in effect, re-writing all of history to match the often-changing state propaganda. These changes were complete and undetectable.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_hole

“Perhaps Raniere will call expert witnesses.”
I can’t imagine what kind of “expert” witness that would be. Every credible cult expert I’ve read would crucify the little perv. I read his “Rational Inquiry” and “ethics” systems and cannot imagine a reputable therapist, academic or philosopher who would go near it with a ten foot Freudian Couch. It is a maze of disparate concepts ostensibly brought into order and meaning by contrived insightful and important sounding terms and phrases – but which Shakespeare would likely describe as…

“A tale told by an idiot
Full of sound and fury…
Signifying nothing.”

“More likely, if there is a defense, it will be Keith alone, taking the witness stand to show the jury why he is the smartest and most ethical man in the world.”

For all I’ve read about this deeply warped human being — I can’t decide if he realizes his true “genius” actually lies only in obfuscation, deception, duplicity and illusion — or if he actually believes the super-human myths he created. Either way — it would be a fascinating spectacle to see him attempt to baffle and buffalo the jury with his preposterous pabulum.

Or, perhaps his radar tripping intellectual energy can be focused on the jury’s right brain cognitive function with a no disintegration signal.

Well, this sucks. Allison should be taking the stand. I am not sure that the jury is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt on the charges. Sure, Keith looks like a slimy doucher, but the criminality of his actions is what is in question. I also am suspicious that the jury has been played with. It only takes one. IF he is acquitted, does double jeopardy apply? Can he go right back to doing what he was doing without the fear of being charged with those things again?

I think that this must reflect the state’s calculations and the emotional state of the witness. Allison Mack is probably in a rather distraught and confused state and the media frenzy (her testimony would be the biggest day in the trial) would make it even worse. Putting her on the witness stand now would only work to the defense’s benefit. She certainly will one day need to tell her story, pay her due, make amends, etc., but that would be better achieved when she is in a more stable place–the trial is about putting Raniere away for good.

As far as cults go, NXIVM is small fry. Lots of people have mentioned that about 17,000 people took courses, but a more meaningful statistic would be the number of people still actively involved. I suspect that over the last few years that would be in the low hundreds. As for now, its probably measured in a few dozens. NXIVM is over. There will still be a few deluded fanatics like Nickvi Pea Pee, but there won’t be many, and bringing in new people will prove to be impossible. So Mexico will be the last place where courses might be run by the remaining undead. The job is done. Whatever the sentencing turns out to be, NXIVM is no more.

So f*** off back to your cell Vanguard, you’ve had your 15 minutes of infamy.

“NEW YORK — Jurors at the trial of Keith Raniere were shown 18 sexually explicit images Thursday of a 15-year-old girl that were allegedly possessed by the NXIVM spiritual leader in a Halfmoon townhouse.”

I’m assuming it was her that turned over that recording of Keith and her discussing the branding? I heard the recording and it basically puts the whole branding thing on him. So apparently she did cooperate in some way. Not sure how much that is going to help though without testifying.

it was clear AM wasnt going to testify as soon as nicole started. having her testify afterward wouldnt make any sense. it would be like having lauren testify only after dani did – when the jury would be much less likely to be sympathetic to her.

my guess is that AM is very unstable and would not do well under cross. she would make lauren look completely composed and stoic. also, the defense might use her testifying as a way to deflect blame onto her and away from keith. especially considering how suggestible she is, they might even have been able to push a false confession out of her. better to just leave her out of it.